I agree that the scientific method and “science” as a whole does need to have some “metaphysics” and cultural/fundamental assumptions.

I am not sure I agree with the following:

“…science does not allow for anything non-material.”

If one views science as an empiricist, and likes Popper,(a fairly reasonable assumption), then the method is roughly about:

1. making a falsifyable hypothesis in terms of a model.
2. verifying it using empirical methods (experiments).
(3. experiments must be reproducible)

I don’t see where materiality is a pre-requisite. The only problem is
that something non-material might not be easily tested, reproduced and
be falsifyable.

Would you say mathematics (a “pure science”) is about the material ?

regards,
JP